[fedora-arm] Re: Questions for building RPMs for armel and armfp

On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 2:26 AM, fedora_arm
<fedora_arm@third-harmonic.com> wrote:
> On 07/15/2017 06:17 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> Fedora hasn't supported anything less than ARMv7 (armhfp) since Fedora 18.
>
> Not what I was hoping. But lack of an armel build isn't a long term issue.
> Do any contemporary Fedora ARM derivatives exist which may still maintain
> armel build infrastructure?

None I'm aware of, there's been a number of attempts for ARMv6 to
support original RPi/Pi Zero but even they're mostly dead.

>> No, we don't support cross compiling anything except the kernel.
>> There's lots of complexity in dealing with cross compiling and there's
>> code that's run during the builds that needs to run on the actual
>> architecture that's not actually compiling.
>
> My information admittedly is dated. When i was involved a number of years
> ago, effort was being expended to support Fedora SRPM cross build by Marvell
> and others IIRC. Appears moot now.

I've been involved in Fedora ARM for over 7 years, lead the build
effort since F-14 and we've never cross compiled except pre rpm phase
when boot strapping very core central bits of booting Linux for a new
arch IE armhfp or aarch64.

>>> - Beyond cross builds infrastructure support is the question of what degree SRPMs
>>> themselves support cross platform builds. This being an embedded platform, runtime
>>> needs are minimal (no graphics, no heavy scripting languages, applications, etc..
>>> So we're not faced with building a conventional workstation class RPM userland content.
>> I don't understand what you mean by that statement/question.
>
> I was assuming cross build of SRPMs may still be supported but probably wasn't
> as complete as the case of a native build. That wouldn't likely have been an issue
> for this embedded use case and the core userland runtime is most of what is
> required. Again moot.

Well a SRPM is essentially noarch or agnostic so it doesn't matter
what arch you create it on it's consumable across all arches hence I
still don't understand what the question is.

>> The Fedora infrastructure runs 32 bit VMs as builders running on 64
>> bit hardware.
>
> 64-bit ARM or x86_64 host hardware? If ARM is that leveraging kvm to accelerate
> the 32-bit VM?

aarch64 as accelerated VMs using kvm. Not all aarch64 hardware supports that.

>> aarch64 is quite a bit different to ARMv7 in terms of instructions so
>> we don't support a multilib style env like x86_64/i686 does.
>
> So the model is a strict self-hosted native build where the host's distro and
> toolchain is exactly that of the target, correct?

Correct.
_______________________________________________
arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org